Hi
Peter Gordon seems to be unreachable and while bumping up to
rb_libtorrent to fix E-V-R, I noticed that deluge has a separate flags
sub package. I remember this was proposed as a guideline and then
dropped. Do we need a flags sub package anymore? Seems rather pointless.
Rahul

Hi
Peter Gordon seems to be unreachable and while bumping up to
rb_libtorrent to fix E-V-R, I noticed that deluge has a separate flags
sub package. I remember this was proposed as a guideline and then
dropped. Do we need a flags sub package anymore? Seems rather
pointless.

Does upstream split out the flags in any way?
I guess in the absense of a fedora policy here I would say go with
whatever upstream does for now.
kevin

Hi
Peter Gordon seems to be unreachable and while bumping up to
rb_libtorrent to fix E-V-R, I noticed that deluge has a separate flags
sub package. I remember this was proposed as a guideline and then
dropped. Do we need a flags sub package anymore? Seems rather pointless.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

I'd rather suggest you to split deluge into several subpackages, e.g.
deluge(metapackge) deluge-gtk deluge-console deluge-web deluge-common
or deluge(gtk ui) deluge-console deluge-web deluge-common.
Bundling UI and Core and pulling in gtk2 dependency is not a good idea
for deluge.
For flags subpackage, all I known is it's still a scratch guideline.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Maintainers_Flags_Policy
Regards,
Chen Lei

I'd rather suggest you to split deluge into several subpackages,
e.g.
deluge(metapackge) deluge-gtk deluge-console deluge-web deluge-common
or deluge(gtk ui) deluge-console deluge-web deluge-common.
Bundling UI and Core and pulling in gtk2 dependency is not a good idea
for deluge.

I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any objections

I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any objections

This sounds good to me - please go ahead with your changes.
(Apologies about the unavailability over the past several weeks. Final
projects and trips with family/friends have consumed most of my time.
I'm back and ready to rock some Fedora packages, though! ^_~)
--
Peter Gordon (codergeek42) <peter(a)thecodergeek.com&gt;
Who am I? :: http://thecodergeek.com/about-me

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 00:56 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
> next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any objections
>
This sounds good to me - please go ahead with your changes.
(Apologies about the unavailability over the past several weeks. Final
projects and trips with family/friends have consumed most of my time.
I'm back and ready to rock some Fedora packages, though! ^_~)

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 00:56 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
> next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any objections
This sounds good to me - please go ahead with your changes.
(Apologies about the unavailability over the past several weeks. Final
projects and trips with family/friends have consumed most of my time.
I'm back and ready to rock some Fedora packages, though! ^_~)

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 14:10 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 00:56 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
> > next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any objections
>
> This sounds good to me - please go ahead with your changes.
>
> (Apologies about the unavailability over the past several weeks. Final
> projects and trips with family/friends have consumed most of my time.
> I'm back and ready to rock some Fedora packages, though! ^_~)
hey,
I've made some kinda spec splitting the package into sub packages.
Please have a look at the spec[1]. It builds in mock. The build logs etc
are here[2]
Please let me know if(when) you think up of changes ;)
regards,
Ankur
[1] http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/deluge.spec
[2] http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/

Updated spec to handle conflicts etc. Hope thats how its to be done.
regards,
Ankur

On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 23:21 +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 14:10 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 00:56 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > I will work with Ankur Sinha and probably do this for Rawhide in the
> > > next couple of days. Peter Gordon, let me know if you have any
objections
> >
> > This sounds good to me - please go ahead with your changes.
> >
> > (Apologies about the unavailability over the past several weeks. Final
> > projects and trips with family/friends have consumed most of my time.
> > I'm back and ready to rock some Fedora packages, though! ^_~)
>
> hey,
>
> I've made some kinda spec splitting the package into sub packages.
> Please have a look at the spec[1]. It builds in mock. The build logs etc
> are here[2]
>
> Please let me know if(when) you think up of changes ;)
>
> regards,
> Ankur
>
> [1] http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/deluge.spec
> [2] http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/
Updated spec to handle conflicts etc. Hope thats how its to be done.
regards,
Ankur
--

I think image subpackage is not needed, maybe it can merged to
-common subpackage, also if you should not provide Provides: %{name}
= %{version}-%{release} or Provides: %{name}-flags =
%{version}-%{release} in spec.
Obseletes is enough to provide a sane upgrade path, Provides is
needed for renaming a package, but it's not suitable in the case of
spliting one package into several subpackages.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitt...
Chen Lei

I think image subpackage is not needed, maybe it can merged to
-common subpackage,

I've done this so that someone installing only the console/daemon
doesn't pull in images. If merged it into common, the images will also
be installed (which *probably* aren't being used by console/daemon)

also if you should not provide Provides: %{name}
= %{version}-%{release} or Provides: %{name}-flags =
%{version}-%{release} in spec.
Obseletes is enough to provide a sane upgrade path, Provides is
needed for renaming a package, but it's not suitable in the case of
spliting one package into several subpackages.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitt...

On 06/09/2010 09:08 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> I'll check up this part and update the spec.
>
Since Ankur doesn't have commit access to Deluge, I am going to be
doing the build by tom. Here is the latest spec
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/deluge.spec
yell, if you find problems, anyone.
Rahul

I think such changes to split deluge package into several
subpackages like -gtk -web -console.... is rather a big
change and it must be done after filing a RFE bug against
the component,
(Personally as one of deluge users I don't like this complicated
splitting. Also this spec file has packaging-related bugs
(at least for directory ownership issue) and need fixing (and
this is one of the reasons I don't like this type of packaging))
Mamoru

I think such changes to split deluge package into several
subpackages like -gtk -web -console.... is rather a big
change and it must be done after filing a RFE bug against
the component,
(Personally as one of deluge users I don't like this complicated
splitting. Also this spec file has packaging-related bugs
(at least for directory ownership issue) and need fixing (and
this is one of the reasons I don't like this type of packaging))

Earlier in the thread, Peter Gordon, the maintainer has given his go
ahead. It is indeed a major change and hence the time to review and fix
it up. Note this change is only going to happen in Rawhide. If you
point out the specific changes, I would be glad to take fixes.
Rahul

Rahul Sundaram wrote, at 06/15/2010 04:37 AM +9:00:
> On 06/09/2010 09:08 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>>
>> I'll check up this part and update the spec.
>>
>
> Since Ankur doesn't have commit access to Deluge, I am going to be
> doing the build by tom. Here is the latest spec
>
> http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/deluge/deluge.spec
>
> yell, if you find problems, anyone.
>
> Rahul
I think such changes to split deluge package into several
subpackages like -gtk -web -console.... is rather a big
change and it must be done after filing a RFE bug against
the component,
(Personally as one of deluge users I don't like this complicated
splitting. Also this spec file has packaging-related bugs
(at least for directory ownership issue) and need fixing (and
this is one of the reasons I don't like this type of packaging))

Also currently I cannot guess what happens if just "yum update"
is executed. If only deluge-common (in this spec file) is to be
installed, many users may complain "why deluge gtk cannot be found
anymore?"
Anyway I think filing a bug is needed beforehand.
Regards,
Mamoru

Also currently I cannot guess what happens if just "yum
update"
is executed. If only deluge-common (in this spec file) is to be
installed, many users may complain "why deluge gtk cannot be found
anymore?"